Canadian Politics Thread

[Ricky Ravioli]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

but they would have killed RCMP officers, if the opportunity presented itself. It's only different by degree of implementation, the intention is the same. 

And if they had acted, I'd say they are no better than the ones who just got caught. 

Bet you most were pussies talking tough and wouldn't have actually done anything but I have no proof of that just going off that type

[RupertKBD]

11 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

This shit is embarrassing. Yes I know ice vehicles will still be allowed on the road. I love how posters in this thread take words to a literal tee in hopes to get some sort of "dunk" it's sad really. They will be banned for purchase though. Is that better for you now?

 

I already said that....several posts ago.

 

If you're embarrassed, I'm not surprised.

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

And if they had acted, I'd say they are no better than the ones who just got caught. 

Bet you most were pussies talking tough and wouldn't have actually done anything but I have no proof of that just going off that type

 

heavily armed pussies. Oh these ones seemed very much the type. Like buddy that drove through a gate in Ottawa to go after Trudeau. 

 

CSIS has put our police forces on alter over alt-right loonies for a reason. 

 

[Ricky Ravioli]

2 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

I already said that....several posts ago.

 

If you're embarrassed, I'm not surprised.

And I had said that several posts before you, but your critical thinking skills clearly don't exist so I wanted to make sure it was clear for you

[Satchmo]

4 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Not necessarily saying it's a bad thing to do eventually. We just are nowhere near ready yet

Nothing happens without deadlines.

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

8 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

I hadn't seen any of that trial, so this is new info to me. They are garbage and deserve whatever sentence they get but they still didn't behead someone on video. They uttered threats. That's still a pretty different level of terrorism to me that cannot be compared

Oh ffs, you hadn't seen any of it or bothered to, idk, look it up? And yet you dug your heals in and everyone that disagreed with you is in a cult. 

[Ricky Ravioli]

4 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

Nothing happens without deadlines.

And what I'm saying is this particular deadline is stupid and our infrastructure will not be ready 

[RupertKBD]

6 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

And I had said that several posts before you, but your critical thinking skills clearly don't exist so I wanted to make sure it was clear for you

 

Hey Ricky, if being fact checked bothers you so much, stop posting things that are not true.....

 

 

[Ricky Ravioli]

3 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Oh ffs, you hadn't seen any of it or bothered to, idk, look it up? And yet you dug your heals in and everyone that disagreed with you is in a cult. 

Some of us don't spend every waking moment on CBC or reading politics.

 

Dug my heals into what? All I said is the 2 aren't comparable and even with the new info I still stand by that statement. THE DUDE LITERALLY BEHEADED SOMEONE. THAT SHIT NOT COMPARABLE 

[Satchmo]

4 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

And what I'm saying is this particular deadline is stupid and our infrastructure will not be ready 

And the race is on....

[Ricky Ravioli]

3 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Hey Ricky, if being fact checked bothers you so much, stop posting things that are not true.....

 

 

Fact checked? 

Complete ignorance = fact checking now? That's definitely new to me...

[Satchmo]

This is weird.  Either the CPC hired offshore bots to make X posts for them or someone offshore just decided to do so.

 

Online bot campaign backing Pierre Poilievre prompts call for probe by election commissioner

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-rally-kirkland-conservative-bots-1.7287901

[aGENT]

12 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

There's many reasons. 

 

People living in cold climates.

What happens if power is knocked out for an extensive period of time during a disaster?

How do we prepare for the load on the grid when all these new vehicles are added.

Replacement batteries are still soooo expensive that people are straight ditching broken down EVs instead of repairing them.

 

There is still many hurdle and the technology still isn't quite there yet.

Long distance hauling. Still very tough with EVs.

 

Not necessarily saying it's a bad thing to do eventually. We just are nowhere near ready yet

 

(I did say OTHER than the aforementioned and obvious hurdles )

 

Ok, but those are just hurdles right? Things we can address with smart policies, plans etc, make small scale exceptions for if hurdles are too high at the time...

 

I think you (tacitly) agreed that we should/need to do "something" about climate change/carbon dependence earlier in the thread. We DO need to move away from carbon powered transport, ideally sooner than later. So assuming we set our collective will towards overcoming the majority of those hurdles in the next +/- decade, what's so bad about banning carbon ICE vehicles?

 

How do the Conservatives help us get there?

[RupertKBD]

2 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Fact checked? 

Complete ignorance = fact checking now? That's definitely new to me...

 

Are you still here? Don't you have to go trade your vehicle in while there's still time?

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

7 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Some of us don't spend every waking moment on CBC or reading politics.

 

Dug my heals into what? All I said is the 2 aren't comparable and even with the new info I still stand by that statement. THE DUDE LITERALLY BEHEADED SOMEONE. THAT SHIT NOT COMPARABLE 

Thank god Trudeau was there to stop it hey? When it comes to terrorism, what someone plans to do is the same as what someone does imo. If you want to argue whether beheading someone or mowing them down in a hail of gunfire is worse, have at er. You were unaware of the threats made by the Coutts clowns but found it safe to make the comparison without doing any research whatsoever. Now that the evidence has been provided you move the goalposts. Critical thinking requires you to analyze an issue objectively. Pretty hard to do if you neglect to look up the facts of the case before forming an opinion. 

[Ricky Ravioli]

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

(I did say OTHER than the aforementioned and obvious hurdles )

 

Ok, but those are just hurdles right? Things we can address with smart policies, plans etc, make small scale exceptions for if hurdles are too high at the time...

 

I think you (tacitly) agreed that we should/need to do "something" about climate change/carbon dependence earlier in the thread. We DO need to move away from carbon powered transport, ideally sooner than later. So assuming we set our collective will towards overcoming the majority of those hurdles in the next +/- decade, what's so bad about banning carbon ICE vehicles?

 

How do the Conservatives help us get there?

Sorry, too many people I'm replying to at the moment

 

They are but also where's the science behind 2035? Why does it have to be that year? What motions have we put into place to make that goal achievable? I just don't like this arbitrary deadline of we have to be carbon free by this date with our any good reasoning.

 

I do agree that we need to be better for the environment. But we also need to be smart about it. We have to do it in a way that brings everyone along and not just the rich and privileged.

I think banning them is shortsited as the technology isn't remotely there yet. Why aren't we focussing on other options like hybrids and hydrogen? Why does it have to be to just ban ice and call it a good job?

 

I have never even mentioned the conservatives..

[aGENT]

13 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

And the race is on....

 

When did the right become such a big collection of pussies allergic to innovation and hard work?

 

The left: "Let's do something required, big, meaningful and with huge benefits to our people, country and planet"

 

The right: "But it will be hard and might not work 100%!"

[Ricky Ravioli]

34 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

 

4 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Thank god Trudeau was there to stop it hey? When it comes to terrorism, what someone plans to do is the same as what someone does imo. If you want to argue whether beheading someone or mowing them down in a hail of gunfire is worse, have at er. You were unaware of the threats made by the Coutts clowns but found it safe to make the comparison without doing any research whatsoever. Now that the evidence has been provided you move the goalposts. Critical thinking requires you to analyze an issue objectively. Pretty hard to do if you neglect to look up the facts of the case before forming an opinion. 

What goal posts did I move?

Edited August 7 by Ricky Ravioli

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Sorry, too many people I'm replying to at the moment

 

NP I'll be your safe space Ricky 

 

4 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

 

They are but also where's the science behind 2035? Why does it have to be that year? What motions have we put into place to make that goal achievable? I just don't like this arbitrary deadline of we have to be carbon free by this date with our any good reasoning.

 

I think "the science" suggests we probably should have done it 10+ years in the past if we were smart. I think @Satchmo already summed that up.

 

31 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

Nothing happens without deadlines.

 

 

4 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

 

I do agree that we need to be better for the environment. But we also need to be smart about it. We have to do it in a way that brings everyone along and not just the rich and privileged.

I think banning them is shortsited as the technology isn't remotely there yet. Why aren't we focussing on other options like hybrids and hydrogen? Why does it have to be to just ban ice and call it a good job?

 

I never mentioned the rich and privileged  Who says we aren't focusing on other things? As far as I know, numerous car manufacturers are in fact working steadily on hydrogen, among other options. And I have little doubt that hydrogen or whatever becomes popular will be more than welcome under that umbrella  But we do need to get off carbon, sooner than later.

 

4 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

 

I have never even mentioned the conservatives..

 

No, I did. You don't seem to like the Liberal plan to do something we both at least partially agree is necessary. So how does your party plan to address these things? Because "axing the tax" and nixing the 2035 deadline seems to be heading the wrong direction.

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

Whoopsy

Edited August 7 by JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

13 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

What goal posts did I move?

You denied the Coutts clowns were indeed terrorists and in no way were comparable the the beheading guy. Once provided evidence you switched your stance to "well, cutting off a guys head is worse".

[Ricky Ravioli]

3 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

You denied the Coutts clowns were indeed terrorists and in no way were comparable the the beheading guy. Once provided evidence you switched your stance to "well, cutting off a guys head is worse".

Huh...

 

I said I still stand by my stance that the two acts are not comparable as one act involved a person being beheaded?

 

Never did I move any goal posts or change my stance...

 

You are just completely changing the way this conversation went down lol

[Ricky Ravioli]

13 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

NP I'll be your safe space Ricky 

 

 

I think "the science" suggests we probably should have done it 10+ years in the past if we were smart. I think @Satchmo already summed that up.

 

 

 

 

I never mentioned the rich and privileged  Who says we aren't focusing on other things? As far as I know, numerous car manufacturers are in fact working steadily on hydrogen, among other options. And I have little doubt that hydrogen or whatever becomes popular will be more than welcome under that umbrella  But we do need to get off carbon, sooner than later.

 

 

No, I did. You don't seem to like the Liberal plan to do something we both at least partially agree is necessary. So how does your party plan to address these things? Because "axing the tax" and nixing the 2035 deadline seems to be heading the wrong direction.

My one and only

 

I mean in a perfect world we would already be carbon free but alas the technology just isn't there yet

 

I mean the rich and privileged are the only ones driving EVs right now.

They definitely are, which is why I mentioned them. We shouldn't just be solely focused on one technology when multiple can bring our carbon emissions down. 

 

It's more the Justin Trudeau plan then the Liberals as a whole that grinds my gears.

I don't have a "party plan" just whoever isn't Trudeau currently plan

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, Warhippy said:

So.  Threatening to murder officers while having arms and body armour but being arrested first is different than threatening a terror attack but being arrested first.

 

How exactly?  Walk me through how this is different.  Explain it to me like I'm 5 years old or supporting modern conservative values because they're the same thing

Seems like you need a history lesson Hippy. And treating you like a 5 year old in order to explain it are your words not mine. 
 

The goal of ISIS is to become a caliphate. They are a terrorist organization similar to Al Qaeda. Their mission statement is to control and conquer the Middle East as well as other countries. They want to abolish all other religions in the process. In order to get what they want, they use terror and killings to control people and governments. 
 

Anyone who is a member of ISIS cannot live in Canada. They would be deported.  Even someone who isn’t a member of ISIS but promotes terror can be deported. 
 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/man-who-praised-isis-on-social-media-ordered-deported-from-canada-1.4880418

 

Man who praised ISIS on social media ordered deported from Canada

 

Now compare that to the Coutts situation where these Canadian citizens had guns, ammo and other things and wanted revenge on the government. Killing police officers is a terrible crime, but so is rape. Doesn’t mean those people would be considered terrorists and deported. 
 

My friend in Chilliwack has guns and ammo. They have like 2 rifles, a glock and some pistols. They have 1000 round of ammo. Would you consider them terrorists similar to ISIS?  
 

The fact is people make threats against police all the time. Doesn’t mean they are terrorists.  Doesn’t mean they are going to behead other people and turn Canada into an Islamist state. 

 

 

Edited August 8 by Elias Pettersson

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

17 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Huh...

 

I said I still stand by my stance that the two acts are not comparable as one act involved a person being beheaded?

 

Never did I move any goal posts or change my stance...

 

You are just completely changing the way this conversation went down lol

What is your point then? Some acts of terror are worse than others? Terrorists should be judged on whether or not they were able to carry out their heinous acts? Are there degrees of terrorism I should be made aware of before I condemn them all equally? Critically thinking minds want to know.